PEST CONTROL
Why pest control strategy matters in healthcare
James Campbell, head of pest consultancy for Kiwa Independent Pest Consultancy (KIPC), explores why pest control failures can threaten patient safety and healthcare reputations and how health estate managers can get ahead of the challenge.
Right: Rodents can
carry and transmit a number of diseases.
Maintaining a clean environment in hospitals and other healthcare settings is vital to remain sterile and for high standards of patient care are to be maintained. Unchecked pest infestations can cause significant damage – to patients, staff, and the organisation. Rodents can carry and transmit a number of diseases to humans, and their presence can introduce and propagate the spread of pathogens, be it directly, through urine or faeces, or through the areas they inhabit. These pathogens include salmonella, hantavirus, leptospirosis, and rat-bite fever, all of which can be highly debilitating or even fatal for patients who may already be unwell or immunocompromised. Most healthcare sites have food preparation areas, which are prime targets for rodent contamination. These pests produce thousands of urine microdroplets and countless droppings daily. This has the potential to severely contaminate these areas. They are also known to leave behind urine and faeces in food products, and gnaw through packaging materials to access food within, meaning this food is spoiled and must be disposed of and replaced. Rodents are able to infiltrate storage rooms and cupboards for sterile medical instruments, laundry, and other supplies, resulting in the contamination of equipment intended for patient care. As rodents gnaw constantly to wear down their teeth – which continue to grow throughout their lives – their presence causes other issues, too. They are known to chew through cables and wiring
in critical equipment (such as electrical and data cables), with the potential to cause not just failure of that piece of equipment, but also a power outage for a whole building, or even a fire. Gnawing can also cause damage to walls, insulation, and ceiling tiles, resulting in further costs to replace.
Mice slip through 6mm gaps – barely a pencil width –
and the sight of just one rodent probably means there are dozens already present. Therefore, prevention is certainly better than cure.
The legal implications of poor practice Poor pest management carries severe legal consequences for the healthcare providers. Expectations in healthcare when it comes to cleanliness remain high – and rightly so. Indeed, healthcare providers are legally responsible for maintaining hygiene standards. The CQC uses pest reports to assess hygiene standards.
In a world where everyone has a camera with them every day, a single photo showing evidence of pests can be uploaded in a matter of seconds via social media. This can create a huge reputational issue.
162 Health Estate Journal October 2026
Poor performance triggers enforcement action and potential mandated support. While not traditionally fined, healthcare providers face significant financial consequences – from maintenance, repairs, and eradication costs – if pests go unchecked. Meanwhile, private hospitals and clinics are legally required to maintain high standards of cleanliness, hygiene, and maintenance to prevent pest infestations. The Health & Social Care Act 2008 requires providers to implement effective systems to protect patients and staff from risks, including pests. The Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949 requires occupiers to ensure land and premises are kept free from significant rat or mouse infestations, with local authorities having the power to serve notices compelling owners to take action. Failure to comply allows authorities to act in default and recover costs. If a private healthcare facility has a kitchen or serves food, it must comply with the Food Safety Act 1990 and
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188
